Psychosocial risks are among the most challenging risk factors in the workplace. In the context of an ageing workforce and taking into account EU policy objectives to raise employment rates, the health and well-being of European workers are fundamental. Research shows the complexity of the relationship between health and work. Bearing this complexity in mind, this report, carried out by Eurofound and EU-OSHA, examines the risk exposure reported by workers and how it is associated with specific health outcomes. It also includes information on the views of managers on risks in their establishments, the proportion of companies implementing actions to tackle these risks, and the drivers of and barriers to doing so. Examples of policies adopted in some European countries by governments and social partners are presented, as are practical interventions, which must be adapted to the characteristics of the company in order to prevent the exposure to psychosocial risks. The need for action in this field is apparent from the worrying figure of 25% of European workers saying that they experience work-related stress always or most of their working time, and a similar proportion reporting that work affects their health negatively.
When looking at the prevalence of specific risks, it turns out that the most prevalent are those related to the type of tasks carried out (such as monotonous or complex tasks) and work intensity (such as working to tight deadlines or at high speed). Around half of the European workforce is exposed to some of these risks. Many workers report being affected by specific working time arrangements: one-third report working irregular schedules and one-fifth report working long hours.
However, from 2005 to 2010 the situation improved for some risks: the share of workers reporting that they work long hours or that they lack social support fell. The prevalence of high work intensity remained stable from 2005 to 2010, and job insecurity actually grew. In certain countries, there is some evidence of increased exposure to high work intensity and violence and harassment associated with changes experienced as a consequence of the economic crisis.
Most European managers (80%) are concerned about the problem of stress in their establishments; violence and harassment is a less common worry, with one in five managers considering this problem to be of major concern. Managers’ greatest concerns with regard to specific risks are time pressure and difficult customers, patients or pupils. There is a gap, however, between having concerns and having procedures in place to deal with them. The figures are better in relation to having ad-hoc measures in place to address risks. Nevertheless, it can be assumed that a high percentage of European enterprises lack a systematic approach to stress and psychosocial risks at work.
In terms of sectoral and occupational differences, work intensity is higher among workers in certain occupations, covering a broad range from plant and machine operators in
industry to managers in financial services. The workers most affected by monotonous tasks are those at lower occupational levels, whereas managers and professionals more often report carrying out complex tasks, which can lead to the experience of stress, especially if they lack the appropriate competences. Psychosocial risks are of greatest concern to managers in the health and social work sector, followed by education. In general, it is found that companies in those sectors where psychosocial risks are of higher concern for employers also have more measures and procedures in place to deal with them.
With regard to age differences, young workers report better conditions in terms of social support and career prospects. However, they have a greater need for further training to cope with their duties, and they more often report job insecurity. Older workers, on the other hand, report better work–life balance, less irregular work schedules and lower work intensity. It is therefore important to always have the whole workforce in mind, with the aim of maintaining workers’ health throughout the whole life course. Only in this way can workers continue to be healthy and productive in work until old age.
Gender differences are found in exposure to psychosocial risks: for instance, women face more difficulties in relation to handling angry clients and career prospects. However, the comparative situation between men and women is more complex as regards other risks. More men are exposed to working long hours (more than 48 hours), and a larger share of women work very short hours (less than 20 hours). Longer hours and working under more irregular time schedules might have implications for men reporting slightly poorer work–life balance than women. It seems that some women adapt their working hours to deal with work and family responsibilities, which may affect their level of income and career prospects. Besides the issues mentioned, other aspects seem to play a role. Traditional roles still seem to contribute to differences in working time and sectoral segregation, which is related to a different risk exposure.
As noted above, risks are differently distributed by sector, occupation and groups of workers. These results and specificities should be taken into account when developing strategies to encourage companies to deal with psychosocial risks. Certain factors that are of major concern in specific sectors might not be relevant for others. When planning campaigns and other initiatives, the target group and the most pressing aspects should therefore be carefully considered. Psychosocial risks are associated with poor health and well- being; however, these associations differ in strength and outcomes. Work intensity has a robust relationship with work- related stress, and there is also a strong relationship between adverse social behaviour (all types of violence and harassment) and negative health and well-being outcomes, especially with work-related stress and sleeping disorders. In addition, workers
who have experienced adverse social behaviour are more likely to report that they have been absent from work for health reasons. From a positive perspective, evidence shows that some working conditions can improve workers’ health and well- being. Facilitating a good work–life balance would especially benefit those 18% of workers who report having difficulties balancing work with family and other commitments. Other positive psychosocial factors that prevent negative health outcomes are social support and having career prospects. It is worth mentioning that findings also show that psychosocial factors are linked not only to health outcomes but also to performance-related outcomes such as absenteeism, work ability and especially job satisfaction. All these aspects are of utmost importance to increase employment participation rates in Europe. Improving working conditions in the long term will help make work sustainable and increase worker participation in the labour market.
Given the present situation, interventions and initiatives are needed to tackle those risks that might have negative effects for health and workers’ performance. There are different possibilities, including the reorganisation of work, appropriate staffing and worker replacement in case of sick leave for dealing with work intensity and monotonous work.
Research also shows an association between harassment and a poor psychosocial work environment. The assessment of psychosocial risks at work and the development of relevant measures have therefore been recommended to reduce the risk of workplace harassment.
The analysis shows that many companies are still not implementing measures for psychosocial risk prevention, or at least not implementing them in a systematic way. Interventions have to go beyond individual ad-hoc measures and be implemented in a concerted way. In order for interventions to have an impact upon psychosocial working conditions and the health and well-being of employees, such interventions should be designed to follow a structured process.
In addition, there is an emerging movement within organisational research, workplace practices and policymaking to incorporate a positive approach to organisational behaviour and, more broadly, organisational change and development, also known as mental health promotion. This advocates interventions that focus not only on removing potentially detrimental psychosocial hazards in the workplace, but also on enhancing the organisational resources and positive factors that promote employee well-being.
There are some elements that can contribute to motivate companies to tackle psychosocial risks. It was shown that companies that know how to successfully deal with OSH in general also were more successful in dealing with psychosocial risks. To help companies overcome their doubts, it might be useful to show them that it is possible to deal with
psychosocial risks in the same logical and systematic way as with other risks.
Existing legal requirements also play an important role; they must, however, be complemented with practical guidelines and support at national and organisational level. Limiting activities to the implementation of legislative requirements related to psychosocial risks is unlikely to be efficient in terms of actual management of psychosocial risks. The technical support and guidance should cover the entire process of management of psychosocial risks and include difficulties that are likely to appear; for example, reporting and dealing with stress, harassment and violence may increase psychological vulnerability in workers and make them reluctant to participate in interventions. Providing support for successfully tackling psychosocial risks should also take into consideration all consecutive phases of the whole process of management. The level of companies’ involvement in dealing with psychosocial risks seems to be a crucial factor determining the efficiency of practical support and organisational interventions. This issue is also well demonstrated by the fact that the sensitivity of dealing with psychosocial risks is mainly considered a hindrance by those companies that already have started dealing with the topic.
Support given to companies should include information on the resources – in terms of time, people and money – needed to implement different aspects of psychosocial risk management. A good way of providing such information is through case studies and accompanying background information. This is helpful in the process of planning, and also helps to adjust the common but not necessarily correct assumption that managing psychosocial risks is very expensive and beyond companies’ abilities. A process of collecting and disseminating practical solutions that do not require much investment (especially financially) by a company should especially be encouraged at EU and national levels. Highlighting the return on investment for psychosocial risk prevention and health promotion can be an additional factor to motivate employers to take action. In general, social dialogue between employee representatives and management in companies has been shown to be a key element for implementing improvements in working conditions. Both formal and informal forms of employee participation have a strong role to play in the management of OSH and, in particular, of psychosocial risks. Involving employees pays off and leads not only to the application of a broader range of measures, but also to their improved effectiveness. In addition, there is a strong positive correlation between the direct involvement of employees and the reported effectiveness of procedures or measures.
The analysis carried out in this report considers differences in company sizes. Compared with larger establishments, smaller companies appear less concerned about psychosocial risks in general and slightly less concerned about violence and harassment. They are also less likely to have procedures
in place to deal with psychosocial risks, and all types of individual measures tend to be more widely adopted in bigger establishments. Some factors can influence this pattern. Employee representatives, including health and safety representatives, are frequently lacking in smaller companies, which might make it more difficult to implement the participatory approach envisaged by the Framework Directive of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health at work. The situation is related to the fact that most countries have a threshold for the number of employees a company must have before the law requires an OSH employee representative to be present.
SMEs are exposed to psychosocial risks, but to different extents depending on the psychosocial factor in question. Large companies are more likely to experience organisational changes, and the work can involve more complex tasks and, to some extent, more intensity. Nevertheless, bigger companies have better conditions in terms of skills to cope with the work, career prospects and job security. On the other hand, SMEs present better conditions in terms of more regular working time, but workers have fewer opportunities to influence their working time.
These results show that there is a need to raise awareness of psychosocial risks in small companies. While doing so, it should be taken into account that the prevalence of certain risks in smaller companies differs from those in bigger companies. In addition, as highlighted in Chapter 3, it might take a different approach in smaller companies to do a risk assessment and to implement solutions. More direct forms of communication are needed; for example, instead of surveys, focus groups and discussions involving the whole staff might be appropriate. Closer proximity between the staff and the business owner (or management) could enable more direct participation. The lack of official worker representatives might, however, present a challenge to the process, as the number of establishments reporting that employees have been consulted increases with establishment size. Therefore, initiatives such as joint sectoral or territorial representatives can be considered a contribution to better cover worker representation in small companies. High levels of work-related stress and violence and harassment are two major psychosocial problems that can have very negative consequences for the health of workers and their performance. In relation to this, social partners at EU level agreed on framework agreements on both issues, which show that psychosocial risks are of concern to both sides of industry in Europe.
At national level, legislation, social partners and labour inspection can contribute significantly to the implementation of OSH management and psychosocial risks prevention and to support employees’ influence in the work environment, as shown in the national examples in Chapter 3. Overall, during the last decade new policy initiatives have been developed,
fostered in some countries by the EU social partners’ Framework Agreement on Work-related Stress.
Examples from Belgium, France and the United Kingdom showed some ways in which social partners and social dialogue contribute to initiatives to tackle psychosocial risks. Social dialogue makes an important contribution to improving working conditions, not only at company level but also at sectoral level, where the social partners can create structures and support for SMEs. In this sense, the role of social dialogue may be particularly important for psychosocial risk management when it comes to translating the findings from research on the topic into agreements and actual workplace practices. However, initiatives at national or sectoral level are not developed to the same extent in all EU Member States, which can be explained by the different traditions of social dialogue and different governmental approaches, often related to the importance given to psychosocial risks in general in each country.
To provide firms with better support and guidance, consideration should be given to the potential influence of labour inspectors, as recognised in the SLIC (Senior Labour Inspectors Committee) campaign in 2012 and in other national approaches in Europe, and to the importance of having OSH service providers and labour inspectors properly trained in psychosocial risk management practices.
Furthermore, pressure from labour inspectorates seems to be especially effective for companies that do not have many measures or procedures in place. It could be that companies that are already dealing with psychosocial risks might already have changed their perspective and realised that the labour inspectorate can be a helpful source of information provision and support. Increasingly, labour inspectorates’ work goes beyond control and inspection to support and counselling, which are recognised as important features to be offered to help companies overcome shortcomings in knowledge and expertise.
Designing further policies and initiatives requires consideration to be taken of the cultural and legislative context, sectoral specificity, and organisational characteristics such as size and legal status.
This report shows the present situation regarding the prevalence of psychosocial risks, their association with work- related health outcomes, and the advantages of creating a good psychosocial work environment – for workers, employers and society. Achieving a good psychosocial environment means raising awareness and demonstrating the widespread prevalence of psychosocial risks to motivate companies, social partners and governments to take action.
Further initiatives by governments and social partners might be required, especially in some countries, to help companies to tackle psychosocial risks effectively. The European
framework agreements on stress at work and on violence and harassment are good references for action. The country comparative information obtained by Eurofound and EU-OSHA research is a valuable source to be considered by national and EU policymakers when developing initiatives related to psychosocial risks. These considerations can also contribute to achieving the objectives of EU policy. As laid down in Article 151 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
‘The Union and Member States … shall have as their objectives, the promotion of employment, improved living and working conditions, so as to make possible their harmonisation while improvement is being maintained’. The Europe 2020 strategy aims at increasing employment by various actions, including improving the quality of jobs and ensuring better working conditions. The information in this report can contribute to reaching these aims.